You’ve constructed a ludicrous parody of a strawman to rail against, there.
When Al has a parody idea, he asks the artist in question for permission to record the parody and release it commercially. His code of ethics does not require him never to perform the parody version if permission is subsequently denied. His code of ethics does not require him to refrain from releasing the parody for free. His code of ethics only requires that he not release it in a for-profit scenario.
So he is not in violation of his stated code of ethics here. AND his stated code of ethics is a higher standard than is legally required.
Ethically going above and beyond does not make one a dick.
So not only is his ethical process unnecessary, it is also entirely nonsensical.
In the whole Coolio brouhaha, Coolio was offended because he didn’t like the idea that his work, which he considered serious, would be shown disrespect by a Weird Al parody.
Whether Weird Al is a “dick” is not an issue that I’m interested in.
What I believe he should do is go ahead and make his parodies and dispense with this farcical permission process.
Uh, what? He released the song under the impression that she said no.
Also, he was apparently always planning to donate the proceeds of the track to charity, so releasing the song on his album, or on youtube would have the same effect on his bank account. The only difference being that this way he released a song without an artist’s permission.
If the roles were reversed and it was Lady Gaga released a song without Weird Al’s permission you’d all be calling her an asshole for doing so and he’d be the hero.
Also to reiterate what has already been said, no one MADE Weird Al send her the lyrics, o one MADE Weird Al record the song. He jumped through those hoops because he wanted a Gaga track on his album, because he wanted to sell more albums.
I also want to make clear that I like Weird Al’s music MUCH more than I like Gaga’s.
I think had the initial response been a firm “no”, Al would likely have respected that and dropped the song.
Had the response after seeing the lyrics been a firm “no”, Al would have likely respected that and dropped the song.
Had the response after going through the considerable effort of producing the song had been a “no-and here’s why…Can you make these changes?”, Al would have likely respected that and made some alterations. Probably would have dropped the song if he felt Gaga had valid concerns that couldn’t be addressed.
But after stringing him along, and then giving him a simple “no”, you’re right, the initial asking of permission was a huge waste of time. However, that doesn’t mean that Al has no intention of abiding by the artist’s wishes. He just won’t abide by them when they’re major jerks.
It’s ok. The three of us will sit over here and play the Fame and Poodle Hat on rotation and have a good time while the True Blue Music Lovers try to nail down who is worthy of their respect, a decision I am sure both Lady Gaga and Weird Al are on tenterhooks waiting for.
Then he should approach his permission seeking exercise by making his “major jerks” clause specific up front.
The fact is, he asked permission and was denied and went ahead and released the song anyway. This “major jerks” escape clause (1) is not something I’ve heard Weird Al mentioning, and (2) is not something that I consider legitimate if he made it up only after being denied permission.
Asking permission means being willing to accept a “no.” Nobody made him write and record the song on spec. When you do something on spec, you accept the possibility of a “no.” Notwithstanding super-seekrit “major jerks” escape clauses.
Coolio never said yes, it was some of his business people. Licencing requests don’t generally make it to the artist, it’s usually taken care of by publishers and agents and stuff. You know, someone whose full time job is dealing with licencing.
It’s not likely that Lady Gaga ever actually talked to Weird Al and probably had no idea about the request until she saw it on the news. Some persnickety licencing agent or IP lawyer was probably just being a bit dickish.
I am questioning is his integrity in “getting an artist’s permission”. He was apparently never going to make a dollar off this song whether it appeared on his album or not, so releasing it on Youtube without her permission is the same as releasing on his album without permission.
I’m even later to the party, but if someone says that “I need to hear the song first,” I don’t think that qualifies as stringing along. A “No” had to be in the cards right? Because in your scenario, once she asked “I need to hear it first” she had no choice but to say “Yes.”
“I need to hear the song first” is a catch-22 when the specific request is permission to create the song in the first place. It was a bullshit request by Gaga’s manager.
I think Al showed some lack of wisdom in not recognizing that and saying “Well, I’m not going to bother then,” but as he says himself, he’s an optimist and took a chance.
You do realise that Perform this way sounds a lot different to “Born This Way (but with new vocals)”.
You also realise that Al was actually SHOWING wisdom and jumping through hoops for her in hopes of having her song on his album. He was doing everything he could to get a Gaga track on his album, even going so far as to release a song on the internet which he didn’t get the artists approval for.
Are you kidding me? Of course it sounds the same. And Al agrees:
I say lack of wisdom in the context of being surprised and annoyed with a rejection. The catch-22 put him in a difficult spot. Mind, I have no real problem with his reaction; he fulfilled the request, was rejected, and now had a fully-recorded song that by his own ethics he couldn’t put on the album, but given that he put so much effort into it it also didn’t seem right to just throw it away. Might as well toss it out on the web.
I’m not sure where the legends of Lady Gaga’s “hotness” derive from, but it certainly isn’t from the photos I’ve seen of her in which she looks downright homely. I’m not gay, but if you held a gun to my head and told me I had to either sleep with her or with Weird Al, I’d need a while to think about it.
Here’s her yearbook picture. Not bad, IMO. In her stage career, she uses makeup and gear to accentuate her features in a way that makes her look really unusual and a little weird. (I’m not even talking about the meat suit and whatnot, just her face.) But underneath it all she’s a reasonably good-looking woman. In my opinion, anyway.
To Magiver: I know he doesn’t need her permission. But he has a reputation of being a “nice guy” and always saying “Well, I don’t need their permission, but I won’t release their songs unless I get it cos I’m such a swell guy!” (paraphrased)
To Bosstone: What I am saying is that the only differences to the songs isn’t just the vocal track. Re-read my post, and relisten to both songs. It’s not like he took an ‘acoustic’ version of her song and just added her vocals. Her people may have worried that he was going to give an accordion filled version of her son.=g.
God forbid, an accordion. That’s just the height of tackiness, especially for an artist who’s so serious she wore glasses made out of cigarettes in one of her videos. </sarcasm>
No, I do get your point, although I think listening to any recent Weird Al parody would put the lie to it. His band is extremely talented and always does a fantastic job of mimicking the original music, sometimes doing it better. The only recent songs in which he significantly changes the music, let alone use an accordion, are the polkas. I know it’s not necessarily expected that people should be that familiar with his work, but it doesn’t take a lot to research a popular artist these days. Or, god forbid, communicate with him and ask him questions about what he plans to do.
